Richard Dawkins, on the one hand, claims that science is not entitled to advice about morality and that doing so would be problematic. On the other hand he criticizes religion for wanting to advise on what is good and bad behavior and what is evil. There are plenty of experiments that could be done to show both beneficial and detrimental effects, especially for those in close relationships. The means of foul play can be used in scientific studies to expose the effects of bad behavior on health, as for example, strokes, heart disease, so-called “mental disorders” and cancer, which are the most common. All of these diseases are inherently ethical problem. So science can make extremely beneficial contributions to ethics. Why is it not being researched? The answer is money! When people understand what they are up against and how their unwitting reactions cause their somatic problems they are able to make themselves well. If you’re in the business of medicine this is disastrous. But, you may well protest, are you going to say that all doctors and scientists are greedy and bad? I would say no, but scientists’ and doctors’ behavior is no different from any other group of people in the community. The biomedical scientific propaganda, which claims that “scientists are all in search of the truth”, and that “doctors are the self-sacrificing heroes” is designed to lead people to reason for themselves that “therefore they must be all righteous”. And it is cunning because arriving at a conclusion by one’s self, one is likely to feel it is justified. This together with a big public relations effort made through all media about all the wonderful new medical discoveries and the technologies that make life easier, is aimed to “win the hearts and minds” of lay people. It is aimed at seeing scientists and doctors as uniformly honest and well-meaning. This is wrong. There are good and bad scientists and doctors.

I suspect only a small minority of scientists can be called righteous and their voices are drowned out. Many scientists do see ethical problems but do not speak up. Some speak in a way that won’t hurt them personally, while others concentrate on their work and don’t get involved. I strongly believe that those who claim “I hear no evil, I speak no evil” are at the very least aiding and abetting evil, if not evil themselves. However there are a lot of scientists that speak in accordance to their own interests and not in support of the truth. This is evident in the way the “scientific community” supports some areas of research while denying others and for no good reason. To stand against this is risky and a bad career move! One such subject is ESP. This is not allowed to be researched inside of relationship. The claim that experiments have to be double-blinded as standard procedure is not true. As you can see from previous posts even for drug trials double blinding only adds to the problem of determining the efficacy of a drug! And yet in the face of this they see fit to repeat experiments sometimes dozens of times or more trying to find the two that they can say are “statistically significant and better than placebo” that is required by law! This is morally wrong and yet this is no secret. In fact it is defended by “the science community”. Drugs that doctors prescribe to patients are not tested properly, which can lead to serious problems and deaths and yet scientists are claiming the method used is a “gold standard”. They certainly need to remove personal bias but double blinding presents other problems so the experimental procedure has to be address as to solve the problems. It is not!

There is no one dictating what is acceptable and what is not or what you can and cannot research. There is no funding organization, whether private or government, that says “you have to do this” or “it has to be done this way or else” etc. But there is a system and most “get the message”. I have seen how the system works with regard to those working in universities. They put in a proposal for a research grant, giving account of the work they would like to do, but if it is not of commercial interest or worse still it might threaten commercial interests, they get knocked back. The excuses given to them all sound benign, for instance “there is no more funds this year for this sort of project, try again next year”, or “we have others doing similar work” etc. They look around and see that their fellow colleagues get funded and see a formula. If you do this, you get your funds, but if you do that, you don’t. If you report your findings this way, you get published, but if you report them like that, you don’t. I have sat next to researchers in the tea room at the universities where I worked and many times overheard their conversations. Typically they would say,

“If I word it like that I won’t get the funds” or

“I want to do this work but how am I going to word it so that I get funded” etc.

When funding comes from private enterprise there is a need for their research to be “productive” or at least promising. That means it has got to enable some company to market something or lead to more research that will develop some drug or other profitable item. Science research that was done for the love of science is only 2% “productive”, which means what it produces most often is not profit-making or not profit making in the immediate future. Industry is not interested in funding research at that rate. They are prepared to donate large sums but they want a high return for their money. For instance they may fund to the tune of one billion dollars to develop a drug and that sounds like a lot of money but they look to gain tens if not hundreds of billion in return, ie between 10 to 500% interest on their money. They want drugs developed or disease explained in a way that can lead to drugs that generate huge profits and to do that they have to have scientists working for them that will “make it happen” for the drug industry. This leads to the corruption of science and in the next post I will discuss this with respect to cancer research.

The doctors and the biomedical research scientists grossly misrepresent the human condition and the true nature of disease. Certainly that helps keep the commercial wheels greased and running but it also enable a toxic people’s war and a massacre of tens of millions to go on. Evil people haughtily claim, the medical industry attitude, especially that of toxic doctors, as booty! The blame is always put on big pharma, with claims of “they drive policy” and “they bribe doctors” and so on but in reality it is not only big pharma because big pharma cannot do anything without the doctors and the biomedical research scientists. It is the doctors and the biomedical research scientists, who devise and do the research, interpret the data, describe the biological processes, publish their research, teach at universities and sell the medical story to the public. It is doctors that are paid large sums of money to promote a drug to the public. I have seen blogs rooting for pharmaceutical companies that not only do not disclose the relationship of the blogger to the commercial interests they are promoting, but often not even disclosing that they are a doctor. If you look for other work they have done on the web you eventually come to posts where they do declare they are doctors and that they are either employed as lobbyists by pharmaceutical companies, on their R&D staff, have financial interests in pharmaceutical companies or all of the above. As far as big pharma is concerned “business is business” But for the doctors and the biomedical scientists it is the burden of blame for immorality that rivals anything that can be said about religion and religious zealots.

Sure, science commenting on ethic.. is PROBLEMATIC!

Dawkins points to religious persecution and there has been bad religious persecution in human history, from ancient times until today. We in the West are quick to point at suicide bomber etc in the Islamic world but we have and are doing plenty ourselves. We only need to consider the number of people burnt at the stake and the missionaries that tortured and killed native people by the thousands. These people were killed for being practitioners of their own religion. Religious persecution is not the fault of religion, just as scientific corruption is not the fault of science. In both cases it is the fault of corrupt people and power politics. There has been harm done in many medical experiments and medical treatments. Some have been in the past, from the time that modern medicine began, but many are still being done in the present. Richard Dawkins fails to mention those. There were shocking experiments done by the Nazis during the Second World War and they were done by doctors but they are by far not alone. There have been many experiments done even in recent times which are nothing but gross maltreatment of humans and animals. I will discuss one example to make my point. And this example involves “whites” in the First World so you don’t say oh that’s just what happens in India or China or Iran or by the Taliban etc.

The Tuskegee Medical Experiment, which begun in 1932 and continued until 1972, a period of 40 years, took 600 impoverished and illiterate rural African Americans and exploited them horribly.. indeed brutalized them and their families. These people were used as subjects to study syphilis. One third did not have syphilis, while the other two thirds did but were never told that they had syphilis. They were told that they had “bad blood” and were told that they would be given free medical care. In fact they were not treated. The medicine was phoney but hardly a placebo since their doctors aimed to do deliberate harm. The aim was to study the disease through a person’s lifetime and finally n autopsy!

They were not only not treated, they were prevented from getting treatment from anywhere else. In the 1940s penicillin was approved as a drug and became the standard treatment for syphilis. The antibiotic could have been used to treat those people with the disease. After all by that time they had studied these people’s medical condition for 8 years. But these doctors did not treat the subjects and actively prevented them and their family members from seeking another diagnosis and treatment as had become available to them in the area; So the study continued andunder various supervisors during its 40 year duration. So it cannot be blamed on one or two research doctors and scientists.

The study was not secret. There were reports openly published and available to the medical community throughout the study years. The medical community knew full well what was going on and no doctor said anything. In 1966 Peter Buxtun, a venereal-disease investigator with the department of Public Health Services wrote to the national director of the Division of Venereal Diseases to point out the lack of ethics and morality of the long term syphilis study. The Center for Disease Control however were the very people, who by then were in control of the study, so their reply was that there was a need to continue the research until it was completed. And completed meant all the syphilis subjects had to have died and their corpses autopsied. They sought and gained support from the local chapters of the National Medical Association and the American Medical Association. In 1968 William Jenkins, an African-American working as a statistician at Public Health Services called for an end to the study, but his call went unheeded. This syphilis study was done with the approval of doctors, and without any objections made by doctors AND from the very top to the wider community of doctors and research scientists, who knew about it because it was published opening in the medical literature. The question is why didn’t any of them speak us? Are they all bad?

In 1972 Peter Buxtun became “the whistleblower” when he leaked the study to the press, which led to the study being terminated immediately due to a public outcry. By that time most of the men with syphilis had died. But it was not the dead men alone that suffered. Their wives had contracted the disease and there were babies born with congenital syphilis. Instead of hanging their heads in shame or scrambling to apologize, arguments were made to defend the doctors. The excuses made were that people who got syphilis were to blame; that they had contacted it themselves owing to their sexual activities. So the subjects that took part in the experiment were at fault not the doctors! This reasoning was used to say that it blinded the physicians and thus justified their inaction for not treating their subjects. Who are they kidding? What about the fact that they didn’t treat the wives so infants were born with the disease? The physician’s intention was to study the long term progression of the disease and most probably also its effects on unborn children. I would say any of the wives or infants born that subsequently died would have been autopsied too. Right at the start one researcher was not in agreement with the study going beyond the first year and the patients left untreated. But he was overruled so he retired from the program. The physicians knew their subjects, they knew their subjects were married and they knew that their subjects had wives. They also knew that those wives, at various times, got pregnant and gave birth to diseased newborns. The physicians involved acted deliberately and inhumanely and could hardly be said to be blinded by the way the disease is contacted. By such reasoning doctors should not treat any one with venereal diseases ever!

Yes, this can be described as racist but even there the true motive is hidden. The harm that they did could have equally been done to anyone. Evil people, to justify themselves, commonly hide under a racist cover. You have to ask yourself, is this an experiment or a hate crime? By the end of the study only 74 of the original 399 syphilitic subjects were still alive. 28 had died of syphilis, 100 had died of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected and 19 of their children were born with congenital syphilis. They had seen one after another die or become infected or be born infected over a 40 year period and they continued on. They continued unaffected by the suffering of innocent victims. They even unashamedly publish their results openly to the wider community of doctors. The catch cry: “Oh well they need to be professional and not get caught up in feeling sorry and human emotions!” Think about it. Do you expect that the surgeon that might operate on you should treat you like a piece of meat in order to be professional? They were only stopped when a whistleblower leaked the study to the press. Who can do such a thing? These are what their psychiatric colleagues label as “successful psychopaths” and they are doctors and medical researchers. And with their own colleagues looking on or having knowledge after the fact because the findings, at every stage, were published in scientific journals. For 40 years the scientific community was silent!

It is also not valid to blame the American people and say that they are racists. When the news was leaked to the press there was a public outcry, so great, it ended the study in a day. This shows that the racist card could not have been played. Furthermore Congress passed laws and set up a commission to regulate studies involving human participants. Medical ethics is really about laws having to be set up by governments in order to protect the public from the doctors. And laws that were well justified because in Guatemala the U.S. Public Health Service doctors did even worse things. From 1946 to 1948 American doctors infected soldiers, and patients in a mental hospital as well as prisoners with syphilis, with the cooperation of some Guatemalan health ministries and officials. A total of 696 men and women were made sick with syphilis in experiments without their informed consent. After the subjects were confirmed to have become infected with the disease they were treated with antibiotics but they may not have all been cured. And such things happen in other first world countries too and involved all people. I am old enough to recall that in Australia in the 1960s and early 1970s there was a lot of effort made by the public to gain the right to have a say in their own medical treatment over and above what the doctors wanted. In the 1950s and 1960s if you had cancer for instance, you had to undergo surgery or whatever other treatments the doctors wanted to give you. If you objected you were treated as a mentally ill patient as well. This was not about health but money.

With all the legislation that has been put into place in most countries around the world things should have gotten better but they are worse today than ever before. Health has become a very big issue. Part is seen in the government involvement in health care and corruption. There are conflicts of interests with respect to treatments and drugs they will approve or will not approve. Part of the problem is seen in the commercial interests selling and governing treatments.

The pharmaceutical companies have gained tentacles in all areas and play one against the other. For example if a pharmaceutical company doesn’t get their merchandise approved by a government body then they use their influence with patient groups and have the patients apply the pressure on governments for them. People are complaining about individual doctors and bad treatments, misdiagnoses and wrong diagnoses. They are complaining about the ill effects of some drugs. However all of this, even though it appears huge, is only the visible top of the iceberg. The big problem is the nature of disease itself and how it is being portrayed by the biomedical scientists.

We hear about how patients need drugs and doctors but we done hear too much about the fact that for doctors and drugs to exist there needs to be patients.

The doctors and the pharmaceutical companies need people to get sick and to have a need to buy treatments. Without patients the whole medical industry implodes into dust. Disease is a necessary part of the picture and yes, it has existed from ancient times. However in the last half century its incidence has sky-rocketed. We think that as there are more people on the Earth there will be more people who will, at some time in their lives, become sick. No! It is the percentage of people who get sick that is sharply increased.

How has this happened? Incredible as it might sound to you this is also about corruption. Disease, and even infectious disease, is all about how people are being underhandedly cheated and maltreated and for a variety of reason. Most commonly the offenders are those close to the victim/patient, typically next-of-kin. Their aim is to manage their lives by manipulating and controlling the other party or by punishing them “for disobedience”!

In the case of infectious disease the means is simple. It has to do with posing danger covertly and thus causing the person targeted to react with fear, which is a person’s normal reaction under conditions of danger. When a person experiences fear due to an external danger, their immune system is temporarily declined; which is a normal reaction. However when the danger is unseen and not understood by the person targeted and when the offenders continue to pose danger over a prolonged period of time, then the person’s fear reaction continues over time. This means their immune system is declined over that amount of time. A declined immune system makes the person vulnerable to infection because the means by which they have and normally use to fight infection are not in use in their body. This is particularly evident in what happened in the Congo. The white colonialist-exploiters had exercised a harsh system of punishments, such as publicly chopping off one hand in those who refused to work, to force the natives to work on their plantations. However the harsh treatment meant the natives lived in constant fear. As a result a large percentage of the population died of infectious diseases. The plantation owners then moderated their treatment of the natives, not because of any moral reason, but because they were rapidly losing their workforce. With less danger of being brutalized by the whites, the natives survived and were productive. This is one clear example that flies in the face of the medical germ theory. It is not the germs that are a problem but the wellbeing of the organism. Our bodies are designed to be able to fight pathogens that are new and that they have never encountered before and to build up immunity against those pathogen as well.

As you saw in the posts on how cancer develops, foul games are played in a way that causes the person targeted to react in a particular way so that their body develops cancer. To get the effects that an evil offender is looking for, he or she needs to be able to employ other evil people over a long period of time. So how do these toxic people find one another? The answer is that evil people are networked with like-minded others thus they can find the people they want to use easily and quickly. Being networked they can also impose a code of behavior on the evil collective. Like ordinary underworld gangs they maintain secrecy under pain of death. And the type of death that they commonly employ is white washed by a medical examiner at autopsy, i.e., heart attacks, stokes and other fatal medical conditions.

Since the industrial revolution a lot of people have moved to the cities so that in today’s world the greater number of the population live in close proximity to one another. Modern technologies, such as the internet and mobile phones etc., have given people more immediate access to one another. Both close proximity and technology has also enabled toxic people to build bigger networks and exchange a lot of information about various cheats or what they call “procedures”. Evil people have became more sophisticated in the foul games that they play. Most evil people don’t know anything about biology and they don’t have to. They only know that “if you do this, you get that reaction and that leads to this sort of medical condition or death”. As one evil man once said to me after I explained how the biology behind anxiety, “I never thought about it so deeply”.

In the last hundred years there have been many movements, such as gay rights and women’s liberation etc., that empowered people. Empowered and liberated people are a problem for toxic people. Toxic people want to enslave those with whom they form long term relationships, especially in marriage, socially and in the workplace, in order to manipulate and control them. Toxic people become more aggressive when opposed. They see a “them and us” world and they want to dominate and rule the world. To do this they have built elaborate recruitment programs to target children, both their own and those of others, in situations where they are able to gain influence or where they can create situation to gain influence. And these situation are not simply physical. Ignorance of the ways in which they operate is the biggest problem for humane people. Understanding that the battle is fought in the mental realm is what is needed to destroy evil people and their networks.

The medicos, mostly psychiatrists, talk about 2 or 3% of the population are psychopathic. And they have conveniently made a large number of artificial classifications to hide the bigger number, eg narcissistic, antisocial, etc. It takes about 5 or 6 toxic people (psychopaths = criminals), at the very least, to get one cancer patient. If we look at the disease load on the world, we can see that the figure the doctors are talking about is too low. I would say the figure is closer to 10 or 15% of the population! And if you add to that the number of people who are greedy enough to aid and abet psychopaths, then the number of harmful people in the community can be far greater than 20%. I suspect the power politics and the dirty games that are played is the reason for the many new and mysterious medical conditions and syndromes that are emerging in recent times. Evil people, though their numbers may be high, can be beaten. And really will be beaten. I will be discussing evil people and their networks in more depth in another blog. I have started to document what I know about foul games (cheats / “procedures” ), that are played here: http://kyrani99book1.wordpress.com/and I will beadding more to this blog in the future.

The foul games that toxic /evil people play, which gain them power and influence over another person, to manipulate and control the other person, is the root cause of all the major diseases ( http://www.kyrani99.wordpress.com/ ) and maybe all disease, even those diseases that are congenital. In the last fifty years or so, especially as more is known and understood about biology, doctors and medical researchers have become aware of the real causes of disease. And of course toxic doctors today know full well why a person becomes sick. They use these methods themselves! It is not some miracle cures but the information about the true nature of disease that the biomedical industry is hiding. The cure to diseases such as cancer is information and how it can be used and nota drug or some medical procedure. When the person experiences an “ah ha” experience, their body begins to remiss the cancer etc. Their body naturally facilitates their journey back to health. This process can be greatly accelerated using mental prescriptions or what we may call well formulated prayers.

The truth about cancer and other diseases is being concealed by many means, such as discrediting of ESP and the use of the psychiatric profession to discredit the link between ideas and the biology. These means help evil people remain hidden and able to continue to play their foul games, giving the biomedical industry, which includes doctors and scientists, the ability to profit from disease. The medical industry is aiding and abetting the worst elements in society to maximize their profits.. indeed to gain profit because without disease they have no work. And diseases are increasingly “maintained”, so patients have to take medication over a long time. People are continually subjected to various tests with the treats of “it could come back” or “let’s see if it’s come back” etc. For diseases to be maintained and hence made even more profitable, the victim/patient has to be abused for many years and in some cases for the rest of their lives while doctors claim no social responsibility.

The foulest means are used to keep the truth about diseases, and specifically as I will discuss, the truth about cancer quiet. It is done by the biomedical scientists themselves and not big pharma.

Science is being corrupted… polluted in the foulest ways for the sake of power politics and profits. So while the doctors in the Tuskegee Experiment openly published their finding and no doctor raised a red flag, here the doctors are opening corrupting science and doing it collectively, with consensus and hard selling it to the public. They have depicted the biological structures and processes in ways that sell the medical stories. They aim to deceive the public. And for their efforts the research scientists and doctors gain huge grants, build large research empires and new biotech companies etc. They become the prima donnas in university departments and of course many are directly employed in R&D by the pharmaceutical companies. The pharmaceutical industry collectively has tens of thousands of scientists and doctors working for them. The commercial agenda becomes evident when we critically examine the way the biology is reported. This corruption, unlike the ESP denials and denigrations, demonstrates not only the false medical story about disease but corruption that goes a long way further. Biomedical scientists and doctors are looking to affects people’s lives and beliefs in many other areas to help their cause. So religion and faith are under attack, free will is under attack and ethics has been reduced to “what suits me so long as I can somehow justify that it doesn’t hurt others”. So it can be said: “what suits me, i.e., what profits I can make, so long as I don’t hurt anyone, but if others do the hurting and that helps me profit, who’s fault is that?” Relative Morality! To make it stick, it is not enough to deny ESP and corrupt the science, they need to take down faith and free will as well and make you a robot, a fool!

There are a great variety of results from the studies of prayer and various methods used. I will discuss a selection to discuss the results they obtained.

Of the double-blinded studies, which showed a positive result for prayer, one used patients who suffered infertility and another used patients suffering from heart disease.

The prayer experiment conducted on women at an in vitro fertilization clinic was double-blinded but to an extreme in that neither the patients nor their caregivers knew about the study. The study, where no consent was given to participate, was done in Korea. Half of the women patients were randomly assigned to believers in a distant country (from the United States, Canada or Australia), who praying for them. The interceding prayer givers were given photographs of the patients. They found that the prayer had a measurable effect and a significant effect. The prayed for patients were twice as likely to become pregnant than the control patients, who had no prayers offered for them. The findings were published in the Journal of Reproductive Medicine ( September 2001 issue).

I am very sceptical of this result, even though as a theist I should be pleased. There is one big problem with it and that is you cannot intervene in another person’s life without getting consent from them first. If you could evil people would have a field day. To do evil work they go to extraordinary lengths to deceive the person targeted or to seriously intimate them before they can try to do them harm. And everything they do hinges on the person targeted believing the lies or becoming intimated sufficiently to buckle. Though a prayer is used to do good and not evil, nonetheless a person’s free will conditions apply. You cannot do anything, whether good or evil, if the person does not give consent to it. That consent, in the case of evil work is obtained through deceit, i.e., the person doesn’t realize what they are consenting to, or it is obtained by force through the use of intimidation. However in the case of good such conditions cannot be used. You might say what about the placebo that is given in clinical practice. As far as doctor are concerned they say they are deceiving the patient because they are giving the patient some substance, usually sugar or flour, which has no “active ingredient” and thus no pharmaceutical benefit. The reason they believe this is because they do not treat ideas and beliefs as having a beneficial effect as far as health is concerned because they see a material machine, a robot whose biology is driven by linked causes. Biology is not purpose driven as far as doctors are concerned. So the idea that they give the patient, i.e., that they have been given a powerful drug that will make them well, is not considered at all, let alone as the active ingredient.

However there is another even more basic reason in the case of the doctor and the patient. A patient goes to a doctor to seek advice and /or treatment for their disease. In the very action of going to a doctor they are making an investment and if they accept the doctor’s diagnosis and proposed treatment then they have already given consent before they get the placebo. And as I mentioned above, though the doctor may see it as deceit, in fact it is the idea that counts. It is the idea of getting well that is the active ingredient, so the pills that the doctor gives are merely an anchor, equivalent to the filler in a real drug. So there is no real deception, except in the doctor’s mind and only because they see sophisticated material machines sitting in front them in their rooms and not the material aspect of a spiritual being with a mind that drives the biology.

Another study, which was also double blinded and followed scientific guidelines, was conducted on a group of cardiac patients that were to undergo for angioplasty (150 patients ). This study also found that those receiving intercessory prayer, which was also without their knowledge and thus without their consent, had fewer complications than other groups. The study was published in the American Heart Journal (November 2001 issue). Only this study had a twist to it, which makes me suspicious of this one as well. The other groups that were used for comparison included groups of patients who received “complementary therapies” or in other words some of the modern medical industry’s competition. This smacks of “you’re better off with a prayer and appeal to God than you are going to the opposition”! And most people who believe in God will pray, but as well as seeking treatment, which they hope will supplement their prayers. If they perceive the supplementary treatment not as good as the prayers then they are not likely to use it.

Another study of cardiac patients, which boasted of being the LARGEST study on the subject, claimed that “prayer can actually cause more complications“! This is one of the famous prayer experiments called the Great Prayer Experiment. It was conducted by the Templeton Foundation. In the study there were about 1,800 patients in six hospitals, who had coronary artery bypass surgery. In this study patients were randomized into three groups. The first two groups, an experimental and a control group were double-blinded so the patients only knew that some would receive prayers and some wouldn’t. Those in the third group all knew they would receive prayers. In this study there was an attempt made to standardize the prayer. The prayer-givers were only given the first names and the last initial of the patients and no photographs. Three Christian churches took part and their congregations were allowed to pray for the patients their own way, but with one condition. They were asked to include the phrase, ‘for a successful surgery with a quick, healthy recovery and no complications’ in their prayers. Some of the prayer-givers complained that it was unusual for them.

This study found no difference between those patients who were prayed for and those who were not, which is after all similar to drug trials where there are people who fare well in both groups and people who do not do well in both groups. What this study did show was a difference between those who were blinded and those who were not blinded but it went in the wrong direction. Those who knew they had been prayer for suffered significantly more complications than those who did not. The experimenters explained that these patients had additional stress, which was labelled as ‘performance anxiety’. One of the researchers said that these patients may have felt uncertain or wondering “am I so sick they had to call in their prayer team?’ I find this explanation an insult to one’s intelligence. They were in a prayer trial and knew that and had agreed to take part and knew they would be prayed for. There are other reasons that can well explain these findings. I see two possible explanations.

The problem in this and indeed all studies regarding prayer is that healing is the result of “the supernatural” and even worse God, “The Supreme Supernatural Power”. The biomedical sciences have HUGE problems even hearing the words “supernatural power”. Look at the criticism coming from Richard Dawkins, whose official scientific mission is to educate the public regarding science. Little surprise he’s an atheist. The big problem that scientists have is that they cannot explain disease in a way that could make Divine Intervention in any way possible. There is complete disagreement for any ground to exist biologically, by which prayer could plausibly, reasonably be grounds for healing. The biomedical sciences are rigidly materialistic. It’s a deadlock, a situation in which no progress can be made. An as I have discovered, it is not because they don’t believe that ideas play a big role, but because ideas brings their propaganda that “diseases can only be treated by physical means” in question. So it seems the old saying “a stick in time saves nine” is considered a solution.

Here is how that “performance anxiety” can be explained

– on “medical grounds”.

The only ones that can adversely influence the patient in the hospital is the medical staff. They could create beliefs even without posing danger because what a doctor has to say carries a lot of weight. However a toxic or greedy doctor or a doctor that wants to discredit prayer can in addition pose danger. And that danger can be concealed because it is in the form of ideas that give adverse meanings to whatever is goings on. Ideas that cast doubt about what is in a syringe can be enough to frighten and thus unsettle a patient causing anxiety. With a patient in a state of fear the nasty prayer could have even more devastating effects.

Anxiety, which is a mix of fear and worry, causes opposing signals. The heart gets signals to go fast and slow at the same time. Such conditions can have an adverse affect on the heart even for a healthy person. For someone who has undergone surgery and who has a heart problem the effects of anxiety are very serious. It could lead to complications, if the anxiety is either serious enough or lasts a long time. And I would add here that in the normal course of events, in the case of complications after surgery, we need to ask serious questions as to how they come about. The doctors certainly gain financially if the patient develops complications. Are they genuine or are they manufactured?

Here is how the “performance anxiety” can be explained

– with the involvement of their “nearest and dearest”!

Heart problems are also the result of foul game play and the abuse is usually meted out as heavy handed means of gaining power and influence over the victim. A heart attack can kill more quickly than any cancer and even if the person doesn’t die, they may need many months to recover. To see the sort of foul play that leads to heart problems have a look at my main blog here: http://kyrani99.wordpress.com/2012/02/09/heart-disease-the-games-get-more-serious-deadly/ and the following few posts. If a chief offender deems that the person they are trying to gain power and influence over is not bending to their will sufficiently, then they may create further problems. The foul games require that a belief be created and that is done with the use of fear. To cause fear in the patient the toxic / criminals brought into the vicinity of the patient need to be given access. This is always done indirectly. At the time that the chief offender, most commonly a relative, visits the patient they can potentially open the door to someone else. That someone else needs to be present in the hospital, possibly with a gun and be in an area near the patient’s ward. The patient will detect the danger but as the danger is not obvious and there is no physical evidence then they will not only feel fear but worry as well. Right there is anxiety. The anxiety can last the duration of the chief offender’s visit and even longer, if the chief offender has recruited a toxic hospital staff member. So a lot of problems can be created for the patient, enough to need further surgery.

The Prayer-giver congregations in the experiment.

It would be incomplete not to say something about the prayer-givers assigned in the experiment. It is certainly not a good thing for anyone to indiscriminately give a stranger consent to pray on their behalf. And that includes everyone because there are plenty of toxic people who join religious groups, act out as the devout and use that position to hurt others. Not everyone you meet in a church or a mosque or temple etc., is good. However the prayer-givers do not have enough information with only a first name and initial and no photograph to be able to make negative suggestions that could have any effect. Furthermore there is no relationship so there is no mental entanglement and no ESP for the patient to become aware of a toxic person’s negativity, if such a person was present in the congregations of the churches. So the prayer-givers in the three churches could not have caused the patient anxiety at all, let alone enough for the patient to suffer complications.

The mentality of a toxic spouse causes them to see their plans thwarted if the patient, their victim is placed in a prayer experiment. A chief offender, who wants to make the patient suffer, is not going to be very happy about hearing that they are being prayed for. They will see this as support and something that stands in opposition to their plans. So they can be motivated to act to extend the foul play even after the person has had surgery.

The only effect a congregation of prayer givers could possibly have is a positive one and not a negative one. However for them to have a positive effect they would have to be reinforcing what the patient wants. So a patient that knows that they are being prayed for and gives consent and further to that desires for the prayers to be effective, will gain a benefit. This means that they will get better not worse. Why that happens needs further explanation about God and creation and their interaction. So I will explain that in a later post after I have discussed the necessary conditions.

While believers already appreciate the benefits and influence of prayer, too many scientists remain unconvinced or perhaps more likely unwilling to accept it. Some are committed to a materialism is all that there is point of view. But I know that there are plenty of doctors and medical researchers, who know full well that the material reality is not all that there is and who indeed know and use ESP. There is a war on religion and God and free will and the mind as anything other than being a phenomenon arising from the material brain. The reasons for the war-path taken by science and most particularly the biomedical sciences against God etc., are the big financial interests at stake, a multi-trillion dollar industry and the status and prestige of doctors and scientists, so they deny God and thus also any role for Divine Intervention. However they can only lose the war because the Truth is undying.

I will critic the methods of testing both drugs (in this post) and prayer (in the next post) because I believe that both are seriously faulty. Many experiments regarding prayer, I strongly believe, have been tampered with. In the case of the drugs there are problems with the experiments that are not due to the science but which in many cases render the science near useless.

The medical industry has been very successful in treating infectious diseases using drugs (antibiotics and vaccines) however they are facing a lot of problems when it comes to cancer. I would say that a part of the problem is that the cancer cells are not aliens in the body but only a different variety of cells. So while one can find features that are unique to various cancer cells one still has to use chemicals to try and kill them that will also harm other cells or cause problems in the body. The problem is one of how to make the treatment unique to one type of cell in the body? This is why there is a lot of research done in trying to find the differences between cancer cells and other cells on the genetic level and why personalized medicine is seen as a possible treatment. However even with personalized medicine there is still a basic problem, which is in determining the efficacy and safety of a drug. Drugs that enter the marketplace are financially successful because they are aggressively marketed, but they fail some of the patients that take them. On the other hand there may be drugs that never reach the market place and which could have helped some people. There are problems at the testing stage of drugs that may account for these problems.

Drugs are tested using randomized, double-blinded, controlled drug trial. The trials aim to compare the drugs to a blank, all other things remaining the same. This is the way of science and works well in many cases but there are three big problems that stand in the way when it comes to testing drugs used to treat disease and especially cancer.

One problem is that to test the drugs the researchers need patients. Patients and cancer patients in particular are people who are desperate. Most people believe that a cancer diagnosis is essentially a death sentence and reasonably so because the vast number do not live for more than another decade after their diagnosis. A terminally ill person will try anything, clutch at any straw, whether it is proven or unproven, real or imaginary to get well. They will take drugs that they may know are harmful to them because they see a chance at life, even if that chance is slim and even if that chance only gives them a few more years.

In a drug trial all patients know they are in an experiment testing drugs. And they know that they will be given either a drug or a blank / dummy drug that doctors call a placebo. Actually in calling the blank a placebo they create a bias because there is an idea conveyed to a patient that they might get well on what they are give and that is not what the patient should be lead to believe. However even calling it by it’s real name.. “a blank” the researchers still have a major problem. Patients who enter a trial may believe that the drug being tested is a “promising new drugs” and that it will make them well. Thus they may choose to believe that they have been given a drug, regardless of what they are given. As they are double blinded they don’t know which group they are in but they know that half will get the drug and half will not; so they have a fifty-fifty chance, a good chance in their eyes that they have been given a drug! So why not believe that they are one of the lucky ones! This means patients in both the intervention arm and the placebo arm may believe that they have been given a drug.

So the first problem is that a large number of patients, from both the “intervention arm”, i.e., those who have been given the drug, AND in the “control arm”, those who have been given the blank, may exhibit “a placebo effect”.

For good judgments to be made and disagreements properly assessed the process of science, especially in the use of statistics, needs to be objective. Experiments need to be set up so that the effects of the drugs can be assessed. However the blinded drug trial prohibits objectivity precisely because they are dealing with desperate people AND because people can choose to believe something that they deem will save their lives. It causes research scientists to end up doing many experiments, looking for the one or two experiments that show a significant difference between those that take the blank/ placebo and those that take the drug. Often that difference may only be a small percentage but enough to show a statistical significance or is it? Is this significant difference due to the drug or is it all just a placebo effect? All you need is a few more people in the intervention arm that are much more desperate than the average of the ones in the control arm to get this difference. Thus they may talk about the patients in the intervention arm doing “significantly better than the average” but in fact they cannot judge whether it was due to the drug or a placebo effect. So the researchers are left with uncertainty as to who “responded to the drug” and who exhibited a placebo effect. This means the efficacy of the drug cannot be determined.

In a single blinded trial all of the placebo effect is seen only in the intervention arm. The control patients, who were given the blank, do not show a placebo effects. The reason that is given is that the doctors might inadvertently give the patients physical cues that tell the patients whether they have a drug or not. However I doubt this would be the case unless all of the researchers either acted unethically and/or gave unconscious cues to the patients. I don’t think this is the case. The reason is that the patients become aware of what the research doctors know through relationship and ESP and this is something that the researchers deny. Even with no blinding at all there would still be a placebo effect in the drug group because it doesn’t matter what drug a doctor gives a patient, there will be at least some placebo effect. The efficacy of the drug is thus difficult, if not impossible, to determine. How to make the process of science objective? A new method needs to be found but the second problem stands in the way and it is an even bigger obstacle.

The second problem has to do with the cause of cancer. If it was due to the physical causes that the doctors consider then this problem disappears but the causes are not physical. Ideas and how a person reacts somatically to those ideas are the problem. When ideas are upheld in mind as beliefs they become the critical factor that causes the person to react and that reaction is physical. This means toxic people and foul play are involved. Ideas by themselves are lame. Psychiatrists try to make a case

that the ideas and the issues, especially of the past are responsible for troubling a person. This is rubbish. It is equivalent to blaming the words of a person’s language for that person’s distress and not admitting to the bully that said them.

If the cancer patient enters a drug trial or begins therapy then the chief offender gains an opportunity to further deceive the person they are abusing. There is no better way for a toxic chief offender, whose aim is to gain heavy handed power and influence over the person they stress, to convince their victim that they were really sick, than to have them believe the drugs had made them well. All they need to do is back off once the patient enters a drug trial. And of course the offender may play the role of the supportive friend, relative or spouse etc., who is standing by them during their illness. It just adds a guilt and / or obligation factor into the game. Many women with cancer marry the boyfriend that stood by them after cancer treatment or even during cancer treatment and often because they feel obligated. They don’t realize that the boyfriend may be the very reason they got cancer. And she won’t realize because the public is conditioned to believe in physical causes and genetic mistakes. How could he possibly be responsible for her having cancer? It seems inconceivable but to make sure she doesn’t start putting two and two together she would be surrounded by people that he has chosen to reinforce the medical view.

If the foul play stops then the cancer stops growing and the body begins the clean up process. So during their participation in the drug trial, whether taking the drug or not, they will have what is know as “a spontaneous remission” but of course neither the patient nor the doctors know this. If they are part of the intervention arm then the researchers will consider the drug worked. If they are in the placebo/ control arm then it will be considered that they had exhibited a placebo effect. How many would fall into that category? Maybe the majority of those who get well, if not all! For the doctors this will be frustrating because time after time the patients in the two arms of the drug trials will show little difference. Ah, you might say but some may get worse. True and is this a nocebo effect? Herein lies the third problem.

The third problem has to do with the safety of the drugs. Toxic people can use the fact that a person has started taking a drug or a new drug to play more foul games. They may create further problems for the person or they may convey ideas that the drug is harmful. Either way complications could develop in the patient or the patient may exhibit some adverse effect and it is reasonable for the research doctors to attribute this to the drug, if the patient is in the intervention arm. After all, the patient develops the problem at the same time as they started taking the drug. If they are in the control group then the problem of course will be considered as something coincidental and not be related to the drug. The drug’s safety may be brought into question and may be blamed for conditions that have nothing to do with the drug. Or somatic condition that arise, which are further complicated in the presence of the drug. So the drug may be prohibited citing safety issues, when in reality the drug is safe. And all of this can also be done by a drug company’s competitor if there are people in that company that are toxic and it can be easily done owing to the networking of toxic people.

In the next post I discuss the testing of Prayer, which is also problematic.

I am not talking about remission here, which is what doctors talk about. Remission is the wanning ordisappearance of the signs and symptoms of a disease. This is NOT good enough. It only means that they have removed some of the result of the body’s reactivity. It does not guarantee that the disease is cured. What a person needs is a cancer cure. That means getting rid of what causes the signs and symptoms and hence the disease. Ideas, emotional reactivity and toxic people are at the heart of the problem.

Prayer / mental prescription

-a request of God – a directive to the Universe ( Mind of God ).

Formulating the prayer.

Write down the entire prayer in detail and then using what you have written make yourself a recording and listen to it at least a few times a day.

The first part of the prayer is to:

1. recognize the negative suggestions.

2. Recognize that ideas are not in business for themselves. There has to be people behind the scenes that are presenting them for them to continually come to mind and trouble you.

3. Recognize that the ideas are only suggestions and that the associated fear is not related to the ideas but only coincidental.

4. Discard the negative ideas by recognizing that they are null and void and that by doing so you are rejecting the ideas.

Don’t use negatives for example “I’m not being gutted”. The problem here is that there is still the image of the person’s gut. Furthermore the toxic people you’re up against may try to use hash as for instance “I’m not being. Gutted!” Find the idea that the suggestion rests on and use it to negate the suggestion. So for instance if some worn floor boards had been removed and replaced then the reality was “the floor in the veranda got gutted”. This reflects the reality and it is not associated with your body. Discharging the negative ideas is easy once you realize that the ideas that were troubling you are mere suggestion AND you discover what event had been used to anchor the suggestion. There is NO foundation for their hateful desires and intentions of evil people. The Universe does not support suggestion and it does not support hate. For manifestation the suggestion has to be accepted.

5. And with this part of the prayer you need to address the issues that give rise to the emotional reactivity.

With number 5 it is extremely important to address the issues because the aim of the aggressors is to create issues to cause you emotional reactivity in your body or to point to activities that will also point to activity in the body or create such activity in the body. So your aim is to dismantle the issues and recognize the activity so they can’t be used to target a particular organ or tissue in the body. This is important to destroy the effects of nasty images that are presented, which are only partly conscious. Without the emotional reactivity the mirror neuron activity in your brain, which affects relevant areas in the body, won’t appear to be magnified. When you make your discoveries and change your attitude changes begin to take place in your body.

EMOTIONS.

FEAR. You don’t need to try and get rid of the fear because it is only the body’s mobilization. However you need to instruct your body that the danger is a threat that is not aimed to be carried out but to be used to try and manufacture belief and in some cases to cause fear reactivity to cause reactivity in certain organs. It is important to do this because firstly, it will lessen the fear, but secondly and very importantly it will instruct your immune system to go ahead and behave as normal. The immune system may be declined if there is a perceived outer threat and may over-react if there is a perceived inner (in the body) threat.

ANGER. Anger is aimed to either make you aggressively fight in the body, which will cause you to generate more cancer cells (which are extraordinary immune system cells) or activate certain organs that may be targeted by the hateful ideas. To get rid of anger it is important to address any issues that you have regarding injustice and/or violations that you feel. However the best way is to see that you are in a war, that as a warrior there is no position to be angry with injustice because aggression is the nature of war. Be resolved to fight in the real theatre of war.. in the mind.

SADNESS. Sadness is associated with issues of loss so resolve the issues. Find some way of overcoming the sadness. Don’t try to suppress it because that can make it worse. Loss of Joy is also along the same lines but affects different organs to sadness. You need to recover a feeling of joy somehow.

GRIEF. This is usually associated with intense sadness and more so despair. Again you need to somehow come to terms with whatever issues you have and find a place of resolution. If you have lost a loved one and you are a theist you can find solace in the union in the spiritual realm. If you are an atheist then you will need to find somehow to resolve the problem.

WORRY. This is usually associated with some issue that has no solutions and if that is the case then you can be sure it is associated with another cheat. Find a solution.

ANXIETY. This is usually either a mix of fear and worry or anger and worry. Issues in the first case have to do with some threat and in the second with some injustice or violation of some sort. Both are aimed to cause you to worry. Realize it is only a cheat and let go of the problem and/or resolve the issues that pose danger or create some injustice.

ACTIVITIES. Look for ideas that indicate activities such as “going” or “thinking” etc. You will find the ideas are general. Make them specific pointing at only one thing, which will remove the general case. Note too that general cases are meaningless because they do not point to anything.

Addressing issues and recognizing ideas about activities and putting them in the correct context you essentially stop the growth of the cancer.

The second part is to recognize that your body created the cancer as part of an unnecessary immune response that your body can clean it away again. And it will clear it away when you instruct your body to do so. You can now instruct your body to dismantle the extraordinary immune response that had been set into motion and which has now ceased as you have dealt with the issues. So you can tackle the cell mass directly. The instruction to the body is to revert all barrier /resistance cells (what doctors call cancer cells) back to fully specialized, fully functional cells of whatever tissues or organs they belong to. You might as well take advantage of the fact that healthy new cells will be created so why not rejuvenate your organs and tissues with healthy new cells while you’re in the process. If you’re over 50 years old then it’s a bonus. So when it comes to clearing away the excess cells, which is out by the immune system by apoptosis, the normal process of cell destruction, death and removal, instruct your body to remove old cells in preference to newer healthy cells.

The third part of the prayer is to use a counterattack to ward off your attackers. The theatre of war is in the mind so your counterattack has to be in the mind and NOT in your body. It is a good idea to look at the picture now and then. If you put it up on a wall it is best in your closet behind the clothes on your coat hangers or somewhere private. You must be sure though that it is private, for your eyes only.

Example of mental prescription (prayer) to treat lung cancer.

I hereby recognize that there are negative ideas about the smoke going into

my lungs and ideas about breathing toxic fumes and

I appreciate that those ideas are not in business for themselves.

There are toxic people, who are presenting these ideas,

Since those ideas cannot of themselves be continually coming to mind.

I recognize that the ideas about toxic fumes are only suggestions

and that the associated fear I feel is not related to the ideas

The fear is only coincidental.

I reject the ideas recognizing that they are null and void.

I hereby advise my body that the threats are artificial

So my immune system can behave normally again.

I recognize the hot feeling in my body is really anger

and this has to do with injustices and violations.

I see that I am in a war and I am a worthy warrior,

standing against the injustice.

I remain calm knowing that aggression is the nature of war

and I fight in the real theatre of war, which is in the mind.

I have been sad that I lost a job opportunity recently

but I put that behind me and I move on knowing

that when one door closes another opens.

I will find a new job within the next few months

and it will be even better than the opportunity that has gone by.

I recognize that my body created the barrier / resistance cells (cancer)

as part of an unnecessary immune response.

I also recognize that my body can now clear it away as it is unnecessary.

The problem I had perceived was only a fantasy.

I now instruct my body to dismantle that extraordinary immune

response, which has now ceased as I understand how it came about

and I have resolved all the issues. I am calm now.

I instruct my body to revert all barrier and resistance cells

(which doctors call cancer) back to fully specialized,

fully functional cells of whatever lung tissues they belong to.

In this process I know that healthy new cells will be created

I desire to rejuvenate my lung tissues with these healthy new cells.

I instruct therefore my immune system, through apoptosis,

to remove the older cells in preference to the new healthy lung tissue cells.

Then go and have a look at the pictures you’ve made.

I see the heads of my enemies cut off at the neck, floating in a pool of blood.

I have won against my enemies, my body is restored to health. So it is.

Part 3 of the Prayer, the Counterattack. A person who has cancer is a person under mental attack, using ideas to try and cause the person to react somatically as to develop cancer, i.e., ideas are used as the weapons … Continue reading →

How a person copes determines what happens in the body. If they react with new emotion, eg anger or sadness, can create a bigger or lesser problem. Their anger is justified because they are being violated but their anger can also be used against them. Same goes for other emotions. Sadness for instance is also justified because the person has lost their health and hence the life that they had. So if they had breast cancer to begin with then anger will mean that the liver might be attacked and sadness the lungs might be attacked. All of this is part of metastatic cancer because the body will use the immune products already made for the purpose. Cell in the primary tumour will be further modified to give them the ability to travel through the circulatory system and into new tissues, eg the liver or the lungs etc.

Often the toxic chief offender, with the help of the toxic mob, tries to create new issues and hence new emotions. So for instance a woman who has had her breasts removed will feel the loss and hence might not only feel sad but grieve. And her emotions are justified but the emotion that she naturally feels can be used to attack other organs. If she feels sad then the lungs could be attacked or if she feel grief then the bowel could be attacked. If she can be angered then the liver is commonly attacked. Liver activity is greatly accelerated with anger. Anger is about a person expressing themselves more emphatically in order to deal with some injustice. They may even need to become aggressive in order to deal with some violation committed against them. Anger is reactivity in the body that produces more energy so cells need to have more sugars available to make that energy. Sugar is stored in a readily convertible form in the liver. This can quickly supply the body with the fuel it needs to generate more energy and in the first instance because afterwards the sugar is moved out of storages sites in the body. Thus if a person can be episodically angered then the liver will episodically be activated. This is the basic problem in diabetes. High levels of sugar accumulate in the bloodstream since the body has not had enough time to clear the first load of sugar before the liver becomes highly active again and delivers more sugar into the bloodstream. In cancer of the liver, the sugar problem is secondary because the foul aim is to attack the liver and cause it to develop cell masses. However it explains why, in some instances diabetes is seen with cancer. A person with diabetes may develop cancer and a person with cancer may develop diabetes, depending on what sort of foul games are played.

If the person started out with colon cancer then metastatic cancer cells will be created in the primary tumour, i.e., the colon and moved to the liver. The body does not create new immune products to do a particular job if products that can be used to do the job already exist. All that needs to happen is for the immune products to be modified further in order to move them to new sites. So changes are made in some of the cancer cells that already exist to enable them to migrate. It is not just a chance event that some cells in the tumour develop “by chance” the right combination of miscopied genes to enable them to migrate. So it is not some change event that the “loosely held” cells just break off and enter the bloodstream and go off to “colonize” some other organ or tissue in the body. There are no chance miscopied genes and there are no viruses or other micro organisms that use the cells to reproduce themselves that cause changes as to cause cells to migrate to other areas of the body and to specific other areas as well because that is what we see.

You will find that certain cancers are seen to mostly metastasize in certain other areas. Metastasis is not random. For example, prostate cancer usually metastasizes to the bones, colon cancer to the liver, stomach cancer to the ovary in women, pancreatic cancer to the liver and lungs and so on. This was first recognized around 100 years ago. A “seed and soil” theory was put forward to explain it. It was thought that the cells needed to find similar conditions as for instance breast cells gather calcium irons from breast milk and go to the bone because there they would be able to gather calcium ions from bone. But breast cancer can also metastasize to the lung and there are no calcium ions there! This theory was challenged with another theory that metastasis occurs purely by anatomic and mechanical routes but neither of these theories provides real answers. And of course they don’t take the person’s emotions into account, that would no sit well with evolutionary biology! It smacks of teleology, the explanation of bodily events in term of purpose (indicated by ideas), a concept which is abhorred by biomedical scientists. Dawkins claims that even in the way the immune system works, which appears intelligent and purposeful, it is still only natural selection at work.. chance events and random variations! But even if they did take emotions into account they would get psychiatrists involved. This only makes things worse because their theories and methods are dreamt up in conferences. They do no science and have no bearing on reality.

New evidence.
Metastatic cancers are sometimes found at the same time as the primary tumor, but they can also be found months or even years later, which mean long after the primary tumor was removed. So the doctors say “it’s come back” because they find that most secondary or tertiary tumors are “metastatic” rather than a primary tumors. What this means is that the cells that form the secondary tumor are characteristically the same as those of the first tumor that the patient had. It was thought that metastatic cancers were only possible after a primary cancer had metastasized. But research later found that this was not the case. They found that some cells in the primary tumor had an expression of genes that gave these cells the potential to metastasize. And all of the cells created are stored in the body for future use.

Genetic expressions characteristic of metastatic tumor cells are called a “metastatic signature”. Signature genes might be “up-regulated” –i.e., more active, as for example genes involved in cell division or they may be “down-regulated” – i.e., less active or inactive so as to enable the cell to behave as an immune cell that moves to the part of the body where it is deemed to be needed. And we are told that all of this is the result of chance.. miscopying or damage and/or viral manipulation! We are talking about very specific and very relevant genes have their expression modified as to change the way a cell behaves. Not only do the definite and intentional changes create cancer cells but within their midst also metastatic cancer cells! Such develops constitute new information and that can only take place as a result of intelligence, the ability to acquire and apply knowledge. Intelligence gives rise to purpose driven changes in the body and at the cellular level. Teleology aye!

All of this is known! Everything of what I have described can be found in the medical /scientific literature! There is research that shows all of the following:

Types of cell that can change into any type of cell.
Unspecialized cells can differentiate, i.e., become specialize.
Cells differentiate to specialize for different functions.
Specialization changes the cell’s:
1. appearance (shape and size),
2. its membrane potential,
3. its metabolic activity and
4. its responsiveness to signals.
Stem cells both in the adult and embryo display such abilities.

There is in the literature an understanding about how these changes.
Changes are brought about by modifications in gene expression.

Some genes are in a sense turned on while others are turned off.
The specialized cells contain all of the genes in the genome
but expresses only genes needed for it to do only one job,.

A stem cell can select a set of genes to express
and thus transform itself into a specialized cell.
If it becomes a muscle cell
then it will express only those genes
that make it a muscle cell.

The cell switches from one type to another
by switching from one pattern of gene expression to another.

Is this a one way street? NO!

Cells can dedifferentiate, i.e., they can become unspecialized.
In nature we see cells revert back to being less specialized.
This is seen with regenerative processes.

It is seen in tissue cultures where cells can lose properties,
eg., their shape or protein expression may change.

Is this seen in humans?
Medical scientists say “not normally”. BUT their literature says yes!
They claim that this natural part of the immune response has been lost in humans.
Some scientists say that this “abnormality” in human is the reason for cancer.

BUT another way of explaining the appearance of dedifferentiation in humans
as using the power of dedifferentiation but using it wrongly.
They unwittingly create unnecessary cell masses in their bodies.

When we accept that intelligence is at work
then we may learn to use it properly
and be able to regenerate our bodies indefinitely…
and regenerate them at will!

YEAH there is an upside to cancer!

What about “mutations”?
To understand this you need to understand a little about genetics. I will try to keep it simple because I know that most people who read this are not scientists. The DNA molecule is a double helix containing the four nucleotide molecules, which are also called bases. You can think of the double helix like a spiral staircase.

The bases, which form the steps, are either A (adenine) paired with T (thymine) or G (guanine) paired with C (cytosine). The code is written in triplets, so each set of 3 bases is the code to make one amino acid of the 20 possible amino acids that can be made. So for example GCT is the code that is used to make the amino acid alanine.
Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins.

A gene is a length of code that will make one protein molecule.

Most DNA damage affects the primary structure of the double helix; that is, the bases.
Bases may be chemically changed so their regular structure is disrupted,
as for example made more bulky or contain different types of chemical bonds.

There are incredible capabilities within the cell. There are DNA sequences that can change their position within the genome. These “jumping genes” can create or reverse changes and even alter the size of the genome.

If a virus infects the cell and inserts its DNA into the genome then the cell knows to mark off all of the viral sequence so that in replication it is not copied. So the virus does not do damage that cannot be repaired. Nature is intelligent. But, the scientists claim “in susceptible individuals this might not happen”. Bull! They are the same species, their cells work in the same way as other people’s. The reason is not in their biology but in how they unwittingly react to foul play, which they are unaware of and which they are deceived by medical misinformation, especially about their ESP capabilities.

Mutations in genes can either have:
• no effect,
• alter the product of a gene, or
• prevent the gene from functioning properly or completely.
•
Added to this is the fact that not only a huge number of changes are made but those changes are NOT random. Those changes give specific properties to the cells that are created. AND those new properties can be seen to have a high degree of similarity from one person to the next with the same type of cancer. And at the same time a biopsy of different areas of a cancer shows different gene signatures. The cells are diverse in character.

Genetic markers turn genes on and off.
It is accomplished by DNA methylation and histone modification.
These processes either restrict or permit the transcription of target genes.

Cancer cells are extraordinary immune system products. They are moved to lymph glands where they are stored, as lymphocytes (B cells and T cells) are stored. And they are most commonly moved through the lymphatic system, which leads into the bloodstream. The variety of new changes to form cancer cells allow them to be transported and stationed in the new locations in the same way as lymphocytes. Receptor sites on the cell walls of such cells signal to other cells in the body, as for example in the blood vessel walls that these are immune system products.

It is possible that there is damage but is that the cause of cancer? If we look at the changes that have been reported in breast cancer, then it is hard to believe these are mere damage to genes.

The BRCA1and BRCA2genes are human genes and their protein products are called BRCA1 BRCA2 respectively, (without the italics). They have been named “breast cancer 1” and “breast cancer 2” because they are considered to be human “tumor suppressor” genes. In fact it is only a gene associated with many other substances that together are involved in cell repair (cell changes) and cell death.

BRCA1and BRCA2help repair damaged DNA or destroy cells if DNA cannot be repaired. They are expressed in the cells of breast but they are also found in other tissues too. They are said to be involved in “error-free repair” of DNA double strand breaks. Are they error-free repair or is this their main observed function in normal (usual) circumstances. When these genes are themselves changed, they are, in turn, involved in changes that doctor want to call errors. However this is only a hypothesis based on limited knowledge, namely that they see them coincident with cancer and cancer is “not normal”. But if we see cancer as a purpose-driven creation of what is really an extraordinary immune organ, albeit erroneously ignited, then the changes to these genes are not damage or errors but deliberate changes.

Modified parts of the DNA, which are also considered to be damaged, they say are “not repaired properly”. In fact these changes may simply be part of the way stem cells can transform themselves to assume a different specific function, seen as cancer. They see the changes to BRAC1and BRAC2and talk about “breast cancer susceptibility genes” and “breast cancer susceptibility proteins”. It sure sounds like they are taking about a proto-oncogene (“before tumor producing genes”) turning into an oncogene (“tumor producing genes”) but BRAC1and BRAC2are normal genes; it is their mutation that is unusual and thus called abnormal. And they talk about “an increased risk” when the mutations are present BUT even with the mutations the person does not mean you get cancer.

The structures of the BRCA1and BRCA2genes are different, but they both combine with other substances that they also call “tumor suppressors”. The naming here of tumor suppressors arises from the assumptions that cancer cells arise normally in the body and they are destroyed and only when there are failures in the system do they multiply and grow into a tumor. The proteins made by both genes are essential for repairing damaged DNA, but we could also say that they are essential for simply making changes to DNA, some of which is damage.

Hundreds of mutations in the BRCA2gene have been identified by scientists. Many of these changes are said to cause an increased risk for cancer. The mutations to the BRCA2 gene are either the insertion or deletion of a small number of base pairs in length of code that forms the gene, so the protein product of the BRCA2gene does not function in the usual way. Sometimes a large segment or segments of DNA may be rearranged.

Researchers say that the defective protein made from the gene is unable to help fix the mutations found in other genes. So there is an accumulation of mutations and this they say causes cells to divide in an uncontrolled way. And note that accumulation has to be of relevant genes that bring about special properties in the cancer cell. They are not random accumulations. Thus the word “uncontrolled” only presupposes that the cell is literally a machine that has just malfunctioned. We do see what appear as factories and machines made of protein and other substances in the cell but the cell is a living entity. So what they see as uncontrolled cell division of a machine that is malfunctioning may be deliberate rapid cell division of a living entity seeking to create an extraordinary immune organ. What you believe and hence use to describe the biology makes a big difference.

It is estimated that women with an abnormal BRCA1or BRCA2genes have
75-80% risk of getting breast cancer, and including all women young and old,
The risk of getting ovarian cancer is:
about 50% if they have the BRCA1 mutation and
about 25% if they have the BRCA2 mutations.

However we can read these statistics the other way. A woman has a
20% chance of having the 2 genes mutated and NOT get breast cancer, and
about 50% chance of having only BRAC1 mutation and/ or
about 75% chance of having the BRAC2 mutation
and NOT get ovarian cancer.

I suggest that a truer way of assessing the risk and explaining the incidence is to say a woman has a 75-80% risk of getting breast cancer and/or a 25- 50% risk of getting ovarian cancer if they have toxic garbage in their family, especially toxic next of kin or closely associated toxic people, especially toxic best friends, toxic confidants and toxic work associates etc.

Thus if they are the target of foul play, they may unwittingly react as to bring about changes in their genetic code so as to develop cancer cells. And such toxic garbage is not obvious; most of them act out a “lovey-dovey” persona when in fact they are fire-breathing hate-snakes. So the woman may believe her husband is a wonderful man, when in fact his is her abuser. And similarly the man who believes his is married to the woman of his dreams, when in reality she is his abuser. Sometimes there are tell tale signs, for example a feeling of annoyance and irritation with the other party and without apparent cause. Of course it is put down to the nature of the disease. It is really anger that is not apparent and for good reason because the foul play is subtle and there are other people involved.

All of this damage and errors in copying and replicating business is based on modern biology and modern biology considers that we are machines. All life on earth are material machines. If we are mere robots then there are no purpose-driven events taking place in the body. Biomedical scientists explain everything they see in terms of the machine just malfunctioned or got damaged. It justifies modern Western medicine proclaiming profitable physical means to cure disease. Money is the reason for the drive behind “the war on free will” and “the war on God and hence religion” because by destroying these then the robot story is set in concrete.

We are not machines and as we are not machines events in the body of living beings, from animals and humans (and I would also include plants), there are purpose driven events. So the good news is that you can change your beliefs and make selections to drive the biology in a different way, for a different purpose.

Scientists have seen the reversal of cancer in thousands of recorded cases. A database exists of thousands of recorded spontaneous remissions. These are by no means all of the cases but only the recorded ones, a small minority. And these remissions occurred for no apparent reason. There was nothing physical done by the patient or to the patient that lead to the remission. So how do they explain these? What, the machine suddenly worked properly again AND fixed the damage? Really! If that was the case then wouldn’t you think that they would study these cases too? Of course not, there’s no money in that. They simply suggest that the immune system started working again and killed the tumour, despite the fact that they see that the cancer cells sit side by side with immune cells that assist the cancer cells in the first place. It assists them because cancer cells are immune products. And just as an inflammatory response can flare up with no “biologically obvious reason” so too the building of what I call barrier and resistance cells also develop and grow for no “biologically obvious reason”. However there is reason but that reason is denied to protect financial interests. Cancer is BIG business. Damage and errors in genes and machines malfunctioning take control away from the patient and puts the doctor in the driver’s seat.

Cells can and do repair DNA damage and errors. Spontaneous remission happens because the person has had a change of ideas and beliefs. Thus the cancer cells revert their mutated base sequences back to their original state. I have done just that and not once or twice but at least half a dozen times.

You might say it seems knowledge of how the foul play works is needed. So how come there was cancer in ancient times before any of the biology was understood by anyone. The answer to that is that evil people don’t know what goes on in the body, except of course those in modern times who are doctors or medical scientists or who have studied the biology. I had once explained how a panic attack comes about by explaining the biology to an evil person. He shrugged his shoulders and said “gee I never thought about it like that”. All he knew was that if you do “x” then “y” appears to happen. The foul games have been developed over the years but much more so in recent times. I strongly suspect with the help of medical experiments. I suspect that experiments are being done to see how cancer can be created more easily and more quickly and that information made available through the toxic networks. Knowledge of what happens in the body is not needed by the foul game players. Evil people have learnt over the years that certain ideas and activities that are covert can cause a related person to react. That knowledge alone is what most evil people are taught by their evil elders, most often evil parent or parents. And it is that knowledge that is passed down from generation to generation.

The second formulation of the prayer, once you realize that you created the cancer, so too you can clean it away again, is as follows.
I instruct my body to revert the cancer cells back to fully functional cells of whatever tissues and organs they belong to. So for instance if they are lung cancer cells then you instruct that they revert back to fully functional, fully specialized cells of what ever lung tissues they belong to.
AND that all excesses be rapidly removed by apoptosis.
I also add one extra thing. Since the cells created will be newer cells and rejuvenated cells then I also instruct that in the apoptosis process that older cells be removed in preference to the younger, newer cells. You might as well rejuvenate your organs given the opportunity.

In the next post I will discuss the counter attack to ward off the enemy.

Note: this continues on from the last post.
For cancer to develop the targeted organ or tissue needs to be activated and this is done by two main methods.

One is to create issues so that other emotions become involved. These emotions may also be unclear in some cases and may become obvious after a diagnosis. And if they do they may appear to be as a result of a diagnosis. Certainly for most people a diagnosis of cancer is frightening so there is added fear and understandably. You only need to look at how many survive beyond ten years to appreciate their fear is justified. However that fear can become a part of the foul play as well and compounds the health problems the person faces already. This can also be true of anxiety (mix of fear and worry, or anger and worry are the main forms of anxiety), sadness, despair, anger, loss of joy and worry.

The emotions are associated with particular organs of the body because some of the processes and events that take place in the body are part and parcel of emotional reactivity. So the relevant organs will have some extra activity. So for instance crying is a characteristic of sadness and even if the person does not actually shed tears water metabolism is still affected. For example extra activity in the lungs associated with the short sharp breathing of crying can still occur, though far less than in actual crying. However this can still cause congestion in the lungs. The main organs which involve the movements of water are the skin, the bowel, the lungs and the kidney but they are not all associated with crying and the upheaval felt in the body is caused by the ideas of loss. If the sadness goes to grief then the bowel is affected as I explained above in the section on bile acids being present in the colon. Sometimes this activity is obvious, sometimes it is obscure. If the person feels sadness then the lungs are the main area with activity so ideas of harm in the lung are used in a cheat. Ideas about toxic smoke or tar getting into the lungs and “smoking causes lung cancer” found on cigarette packets (as an ever present affirmation to a smoker) are easily used. Sadness and the very act of breathing in, if the person is a smoker, will cause activity in the lungs. Ideas can activate mirror neurons in the brain, which in turn can cause activity to be felt in some part of the body. If these ideas and the activity felt coincide with the activity due to sadness and actions, such as smoking, then the activity felt due to mirror neurons may appear to account for the activity in the lungs. A smoker is conscious of the lungs inflating and the action of smoke filling the alveoli etc., but it seems they are not aware of it. In fact they are aware only the focus of interest is not associated with smoking, as also it may not be associated with the activity caused by sadness. The ideas capture attention and the focus of interest so all of the activity can be wrongly attributed to the ideas. This is the aim of the cheaters because that is what will make the person move their body to action.

The other main method of activation of an organ or tissue is the use ideas of actions taking place, which are anchored in some activity of a person’s life. These ideas are based on real events but made general and used with other ideas to give rise to reactivity in an organ or tissue.
Two examples:
1. The pancreas can be activated to higher than normal levels of activity by ideas of “it’s going” or “it’s got the go” etc., BUT there needs to be a real event to anchor this idea. So if there is a real case of a person doing something or waiting to do something, as for instance go on a holiday, then the expectation of action can be used in foul game play. The idea of activity causes the body to move sugar into the blood stream and for the pancreas to make and release insulin to enable cells to use the sugar that has been made available. Insulin acts as a key to get the sugar past the cell wall. The activity of the pancreas is then married together with hateful images of attacking the area of the organ; as for instance barely conscious ideas of a knife put into the person’s midriff. Such ideas may give an unusual feeling in the area.

One of the early signs of pancreatic cancer is of having lots of energy but not being able to think as clearly as normal, together with a dull pain or unusual nauseas-like feeling in the midriff area. Thinking is affected because the brain is affected. With a more than normal insulin in the blood stream the cells in the body get a higher proportion of sugar so the brain is partly starved. This means that unnecessary activity in the brain such as thinking is affected, as the brain uses the sugar for vital activities. To overcome the problem, given that you recognize the cheat, all you need to do is recognize that “going” is general. So make an affirmation that links the “going” with the holiday or whatever it is. The “going” becomes specific and cannot be associated with other ideas. The ideas of “going” can only be used if they are general. All of us tend to think, using what we mean to be specific, in general terms. If you suspect foul play then you need to be specific in your thinking to overcome the problem.

2. The brain activity associated with thinking can be used to cause reactivity in the brain that leads to brain cancer. And suggestion can be as simple as “what’s that you’re thinking about”. If it’s a question and if the person is engaged in some project then this will cause more thinking as well as the thinking the person is already engaged in. It could also be hashed to “what’s that, you’re thinking.. a bout”, which of course changes the meaning and adds something sinister. Various images of harm can be associated with “what’s that” and “a bout” etc. Thinking requires activity in the brain and images may also cause mirror neuron activity that targets the thinking area. This means that the specific area for thinking in the front of the brain has more activity than is normal for thinking. There will be an impression that the activity is due to the images when indeed most of the activity is due to thinking. The use of mobile phones which are held close to the head is another way used. This is greatly aided when the media reports medical stories about “mobile phone use linked to cancer”. The person needs to buy into and believe that the radiation associated with a mobile phone will go into their brain and do harm. Here again it is activity in the brain that is used. When a person uses a mobile phone they are normally talking to someone, so their brain will be engaged in a number of different activities, including hearing and short term memory as well as thinking and some excitement or other emotion, all of which involve activity in the brain. If they are simultaneously targeted, which can so easily be done, even by the very person they are talking to, then again images that trigger mirror neurons can be used. These images create activity that comes on top of what is normal and associated with thinking and talking and listening etc. Such activity can be erroneously taken to be due to the imagery of rays going into the brain and doing harm, especially to a lay person, who doesn’t understand the issues.

My insightful observations at the cellular level.
At first and not on every occasion, there may be an inflammatory response as I described above, but it is soon realized that as the ideas persist this response is not useful. So the body, in most cases ceases the inflammatory response and goes on a different course of action. A barrier or resistance front is built to protect or ward off the perceived danger. The only material that the body has, with which to build such a barrier, is cells. The stem cells on the surface of the organ or tissue, which is thought to be under attacked, are used for the purpose. These cells are capable of transformation. I have insightfully observed such transformation taking place. I have been able to insightfully perceive at the cellular level from early childhood. When I had first looked under a microscope at cells I was amazed to see cells with my eyes what I could see mentally. It proved to me that my mental ability was genuine. In the mid 1980’s I had developed this ability further when I learnt Buddhist walking meditation. I can now see at the sub-cellular level at the various organelles and structure found inside a cell, whereas before I could see the cell with a darker patch where the nucleus was found. I am still in the process of developing this ability further. I can see some detail at the sub-organelle level and sufficient to have perceived generally what is going on but not enough to observe genes and the fine working of protein machines. They appear too hazy.

I have seen that in the very first instance, a layer of different looking cells at the very surface of an organ’ inner or outer surface or of a tissue would appear and grow larger. Then I had occasion to look at the very beginning, when the first few cells were transformed. I had been given some mastic sweet together with some groceries I had bought. The shopkeeper told me that it was past it’s due date and she would have thrown it out. She knew I liked mastic so she gave it to me and told me that if I didn’t want it to “just throw it away”. I could see that this was an attempt to try and create oesophageal cancer. It was a golden opportunity for me to observe, from the very beginning, the whole process. But I also knew that as I wasn’t angry I would not see a really dramatic effect.

Sure enough that very night I experience a very hot feeling and ideas of “it’s toxic and doing you harm” and that “it was tree resin and out of date and hence toxic” and so on. I let the ideas stand and I observed a cytotoxic attack in an area further down from my throat. It was being damaged by an inflammatory response. I was able to halt the inflammatory response by upholding ideas that “this response was not going to do any good” but I continued to allow the ideas of “toxic.. tree resin.. out of date.. harmful etc., that were being addressed to me by toxic people trying to harm me. I then focused on the area that had been attacked and had become sore earlier. Now I saw cells being transformed. Before cell division they had a different look to the look they had after they divided. And while the cells that originally divided looked like cells further away, those that were produced looked different. I had also looked at them more closely and noted that there were differences in the early part of the cell’s dividing cycle. It was as if there was some stagnation and nothing seemed to be happening for a while. I suspect this was before the DNA copying began. I suspect also that there was activity that was too subtle for me to observe. I suspect some genes are somehow changed but as my insightful perception is not good enough to perceive these details so I cannot say this with certainty. But it was easy enough to see that the changes made the cell more primitive in their form and function. And the new cells appeared to be more active, especially in dividing and in their movements against one another than the cells further away and outside of the new layer.

I then discharged the thoughts of harm and ate the mastic with confidence that it was harmless. I again continued my insightful observations. I could see that the cells again underwent changes. This time the cells reverted back to their previous look but not during cell division. In fact it was hard to find any dividing. There was greater activity inside the cell for a time and then the cells began to look more and more like the normal cells around them. I wanted to apply my prayer formula but by the time I had got that far most were already back to normal. However I did expect that the cells would revert back because I have affirmed that in prayer in a dozen times on other occasions. So it is possible that the cells changed more quickly than they would have without this affirmation. I rang the lady and asked her if she had any more mastic and it didn’t matter if it was out of date, I’d still buy it but she said she hadn’t, so I was unable to repeat that experiment.

I have seen on other previous occasions that if the ideas persist and especially if the ideas seem overwhelming then these more primitive cells begin to divide much faster. The layer becomes thicker and small capillary blood vessels grow towards and into this new cell mass. It is not unlike seeing tissue healing after a cut or some damage. I had had an accident and ran into a large bolt that was sticking out of a door. It went into my upper arm on the inside just above the joint and stuck there. I had to pull it out and there was blood squirting out. I had used this occasion as a meditative observation in order to see if I could get ordinary cells to grow faster. It was possible but they reflected a mental blueprint and in some sense seemed to grow to a preordained pattern and no further. They didn’t just grow and grow. And of course there was no fear and anger that could have contributed to extraordinary cells and growth. On that occasion I had also seen how as the new tissue grew so too the blood supply was extended and capillaries grew into the new tissue.

Anger is essential.
Anger, as I mentioned above is a very necessary ingredient in cancer because the person must be made aggressive. But the aggression has to be honed so that the person struggles against what they see as some “nebulous inner force”. This struggle is critical to causing cancer. I have seen that no amount of anger is capable of igniting cancer if the person recognizes the cheat. One does not engage in an inner struggle by recognizing that the villains are far from nebulous. The villains are real people, with names and addresses and phone numbers, flesh and blood and bones! When you know that you know that a struggle in the body is fiction.. not real. It is also worth saying that suggestions that are all fleeting and barely conscious are useless in causing cancer. The personal self needs to be moved and moved significantly and that cannot be done by ideas that are barely conscious. The personal self needs to be set into a struggle and driven to struggle. I have found that since my enemies have tried to be elusive and present ideas that are barely conscious most of the time, I have found it extremely easy to avoid disease, even when I am angered.

An evil person on the other hand is at a greater disadvantage because rage is an inner quality of evil people. Rage is what they take pride in, see it as booty and use it as a weapon against others. However in the case where they themselves are under attack by “their own people”, i.e., other evil people, then that rage means the cancer will grow at an enormous speed. An evil person has no chance of winning against cancer, especially if the aim of the toxic mob is to kill them. Evil people become enraged if they are opposed. I’ve known evil people that became angry even if you disagreed with them about the weather. The rage of being opposed causes them to set forth a huge struggle that becomes aggressive cancer.

I should also say that while anger provides extra fuel materials in the bloodstream that can allow cells, which start to divide, to do so more rapidly, the fuel availability is not enough to cause cancer. I have been angered repeatedly in recent years and I have easily avoided cancer and diabetes, both of which are based around anger. So I can safely say that the availability of fuels and nutrients in the bloodstream do not make changes at the cellular level that translate to abnormality.

Bad days.
The changes that take place in the cells and the growth of the cell mass occur at certain times and on certain days and not on continuously. The struggle took place at times when I had felt a lot of fear and/or anger or was aware of a lot of heat in my body. At such times I was making a lot of effort to fight the seeming internal aggressors. I had felt a struggle going on. And on those days I also noticed extremely aggressive growth of the cells in a mass that had formed. Then I realized that toxic people gather and at such times criminals are employed and given the means to pose danger. Thus there are days when this happens and days when this does not happen. And sometimes such gatherings may go on for several hours and other times for a day or two at a time. These are what cancer patients refer to as “bad days”. It is possible using simple mental techniques to observe the source of the fear and anger and to recognize the angry aggressors that stand behind the issues in mind. Indeed it is possible to use this method to draw their faces because an aggressor that is attacking cannot hide their face within the mental realm. Physical means cannot protect or hide them. Even when they use other people to hide behind, they can still be seen. Both the strongly related and the trivially related people can be “remote viewed” out of the mental darkness. You can draw them and see who you are up against. And such drawings can be used in a counter attack as I will describe in the next section.